5 comments about The Politics of Hope: Reviving the Dream of Democracy.

1. In isolation, for those that do not read widely, this book is a four-star book, a classic comics version of much more substantive works by Tom Atlee, James McGregor Burns, Robert Buckman, Allison Fine, Robert Fuller, William Greider, Richard Moore, Bill Moyer, Steven Pinker, James Rough, and many others.
   
   Here is the book, expanded into 214 under-sized, double-spaced pages:
   
   Four Stages of Political Evolution
   1) Anarchy
   2) Fear & Polarization
   3) Silence & Resignation
   4) Politics of Hope
   
   Seven Practices for Beocming a Concious Political Leader
   1) Finding Your Spiritual Center
   2) Serving with Higher Motives
   3) Sharing Your Unique Gifts
   4) Cultivating Your Political Habitat
   5) Communicating with Integrity & Trust
   6) Trusting the Mystery
   7) Answering the Call
   
   Got all that? That's all there is. This is largely consultant pap. It fails to satisfy, unless this is the only book you plan to read over the course of the year, in which case it marginally communicates some of the larger ideas many others have spent decades nurturing.
   
   The bibliography, which includes the Da Vinci Code (now, that is a real page turner, but is it really relevant here?), looks suspiciously like a thrown-together blend of what happened to be on the author's shelves and a quick survey of leadership books.
   
   I am not impressed. This book, which has a patina of bland and somewhat pretentious points to make, is one notch above the garbage that Rudy "Scoop & Dump" Gulliani publishes. He is the pimp of voyeur leadership, this author is the mistress of platitudinal leadership consulting.
   
   Yuck. Well-intentioned but tired. You'd be better off reading my reviews of the works listed below, and see also my lists, including the one on moral leadership.
   
   The Tao of Democracy: Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That Works for All
   Transforming Leadership
   Building a Knowledge-Driven Organization
   Momentum: Igniting Social Change in the Connected Age
   All Rise: Somebodies, Nobodies, and the Politics of Dignity (Bk Currents)
   Who Will Tell The People? : The Betrayal Of American Democracy
   Doing Democracy
   Escaping the Matrix: How We the People can change the world
   The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
   Society's Breakthrough!: Releasing Essential Wisdom and Virtue in All the People



2. Zajonc's book is applicable not only to American politics, but to Canadian as well. She speaks of four stages of political evolution, from anarchy and traditionalism, through resignation to the politics of hope.
   
   In the spring of 2005, I was in the resignation stage. Never one to be involved in politics beyond voting on election day, I was fed up with the state of affairs in Ottawa. Government seemed to be more about destroying the other parties than about the good of the country.
   
   There has to be a better way, I said to myself. I was soon surprising myself by entering the race for federal office. Over and over I heard myself saying, "We have to learn to work together." I am still saying this, and am so pleased to have found Zajonc's book as a concise and articulate voice toward that end.



3. The Politics of Hope lays out an insightful premise that I realize now is absolutely true:what distinguishes those political leaders who leave a positive and lasting impact on their world from those who don't is not political affiliation or fund raising skills or even organizational savvy. Its their stage of conscious development, an argument the author establishes with clarity, examples and compelling reason. I immediately understood why some leaders are attractive to me while others leave me hungry for something more. This could just as easily be a book about the evolution of conscious leadership, not just conscious political leadership.
   
   A must read for anyone committed to social change on a local, state or national level. I was actually left with a greater sense of hope that it's not crazy but genuinely possible to cultivate greater consciousness in one's own leadership and that this act alone evokes greater contributions from those around us. The Politics of Hope shows there is something greater than fear to bring us forward as a nation and as a planet.



4. Donna Zajonc's book makes one long for the Politics of Hope to become active in our lives and the lives of our political leaders. A learning experience. Imagine, a new way of listening!! One could almost wish the book carried the word "Politics" as a subtitle, as Zajonc truly brings "life wisdom" to the ordinary folks who are fortunate enough to read it. Thoughtful, intelligent, READABLE.



5. Donna Zajonc sees hope within the breakdowns of our current political system. She believes that these breakdowns will lead to positive breakthroughs and a collaborative, interconnected, genuine democracy will result. If that doesn't give you hope I'm not sure what will! Zajonc appreciates the all-evolving process of the democratic sytem, inspiring creation, participation and hope, rather than feelings of defeat, resignment and distrust.
   Zajonc's "Seven Practices for Becoming a Conscious Public Leader" will completely shift your view on political leaders, challenging the generalizations and stereotypes associated with what seems like a hopeless, paralyzing system. She proposes several powerful concepts for our upcoming leaders, pushing politicians to view things differently--beyond current party structures--while challenging leaders to serve with only their highest motives and fulfill their greatest potential of integrity and genuine public service. This book may shift your view of "politics as a dirty word" to "politics of hope"; Nonetheless, it is like no political book I've read. You'll never see politics the same again! Pass it on!

5 comments about Bridging the Divide: My Life.

1. I was honored to be a witness to some of the early discussions between Ed Brooke and his former colleagues and staff as this book was being written. As you read this special book you will also feel like you have been granted a front row seat to the making of history. At a time when political fundamentalism was starting to again flex its ugly muscles in our government, Senator Edward Brooke was a voice of moderation and wisdom for both Democrats and Republicans. This book, by one of the great politicians of our time, reminds us what political leadership can (and should) be like. More Ed Brooks are needed in our government today. I have known Ed and his family as both his priest and friend since 1982, and I can honestly say that Ed Brooke is, at the core of his being, a caring, compassionate, and courageous man of faith with a wonderful sense of humor. He doesn't talk about "family values;" he lives them! I strongly recommend BRIDGING THE DIVIDE to all who appreciate the history of our wonderful nation and who value the dedication and skill of men and women like Senator Brooke. They have truly made our country a better place.
   
   The Rev. Dr. Prentice Kinser III, Author of Limitless Living, A Guide to Unconventional Spiritual Exploration and Growth



2. "Bridging the Divide" is a fantastic read, a portrait of the nation's first African-American Senator and the only black person in that position - thus far - to be re-elected. The book profiles Senator Edward Brooke's life and emphasizes his incredible ability to connect with people despite racial or political barriers. An African-American, Episcopalian, and Republican, he was sent to the Senate and maintained strong support from the people of Massachusetts, a state with a large white, Roman Catholic, and Democrat population.
   
   Senator Brooke's writing is full of great references to how far our country has come in the battle against racism and destructive politics. Whether the Senator is describing his controversial decision to jump into the Senate race, or the day he jumped into the Senate swimming pool with Strom Thurmond, his words are poignant, intellectual, and awe-inspiring. You are sure to laugh, ponder, smile - maybe even cry.
   
   One need not be a history buff or political powerhouse to enjoy this book. It is a fantastic read for those who love their country and enjoy learning about the type of people that make our nation so strong. I enjoyed it thoroughly, and recommend it to all of my friends. If you're looking for a good read this summer (or for any time of year), "Bridging the Divide" is it.



3. I had the good fortune to serve in the Massachusetts state senate as a Republican during Senator Ed Brooke's second term. Though I was more conservative than he, he always unstintingly leant me his support, help and advice. His defeat in 1978, aided by right-wing Republicans, was a great loss to the Commonwealth, the country and, not least to the Republican party. Increasingly the crazies in each party are dragging the process toward the fringes. But elections are won nationally by center-right coalitions or center-left coalitions. The collapse of the center in the Republican party portends renewed Democratic dominance of American politics. A Republican party without room for the talent and convictions of an Ed Brooke will increasingly marginalize itself.
   
   There are some great political stories in Bridging the Divide, not least about Hillary Clinton, and you will get your money's worth from reading them. But this book should be read by everyone who cares about the future of the Republican party--and the nation. The increasing mean-spiritedness of both parties, and the increasing focus on narrow wedge issues, creates a great danger for the Republic. Just as the Democrats need more centrists, the Republican party needs more men and women like Ed Brooke. Where are they to come from?
   
   Robert A. Hall
   Author of "The Good Bits."



4. Leave it to Massachusetts to send the first Black Senator elected by popular vote to Congress. The heavily, 98% white Democrat State overwhelming supported him for the state's highest National Office even though he was the "Republican" candidate. Senator Brooke was elected in a landslide by the voters of his liberal state because he had already proven he was an honest, hardworking, devoted, corruption-fighting Attorney General for the Commonwealth. Once in the U.S. Senate he continued to prove he was a wise man with strong core beliefs including his devotion to the Political Party of Abe Lincoln. He was responsible for many important civil rights laws. One of his bills gave women their own credit. They no longer had to have their husbands okay to borrow money and get their own credit cards. Senator Brooke had gone from being a U.S. Army officer leading the Italian Partisans behind German lines during WW II to become a strong, outspoken Statesman Senator. Congress very much needs more peacemakers like Senator Edward Brooke. This book is a fascinating read. Readers can't help but finish the book and still be utterly amazed that Republican Brooke was ever elected to any office in Massachusetts. Unfortunately, he has proven to be one of a kind so far. But there is always hope for the future.



5. As I was reading a newspaper article about this book recently it occurred to me that I hadn't heard Edward Brooke's name in a long time. After finishing his book, I'm glad I remember him. Though not from Massachusetts myself, I did follow his career when he was in the Senate.
   
   Senator Brooke writes forcefully on a number of issues....the racism he faced growing up in Washington D.C. and which followed him into the U.S. Army in the Second World War, his political losses before he finally won a race and especially about his family. With particular care he tells us of his difficult first marriage and his loving second one, complete with an estrangement for many years from his two daughters.
   
   While getting into "Bridging the Divide" it became clear that Edward Brooke was a man of discipline and high principle. I was just about to ask myself why he never made it onto the U.S. Supreme Court when Brooke says that President Nixon actually considered him for a seat on the high court. Brooke turned it down to stay in the Senate, feeling he was too young to take on a judicial role. It's too bad because I think he would have made an excellent Supreme Court justice.
   
   Edward Brooke is reminiscent of the days when the Senate was a kinder place. There are very few people in his category these days....moderate to liberal Republican. His was part of the Republican party I remember growing up...one that has changed drastically. Senator Brooke's contributions to our country have been many and I'm glad he's still around to write about it. "Bridging the Divide" is a book I highly recommend.

5 comments about Andrew Jackson: The Course of American Empire, 1767-1821. Vol. 1.

1. I almost picked a shorter book about Jackson rather than try to tackle this three volume set, but judging by the first volume there is no question I made the right choice!
   
   This is one of the best biographies I've ever read; not only is the subject compelling, but it is superbly written and the balance of information (like the selection of anecdotes and quotes) is perfect. It even includes a timeline and family trees (why don't more authors do this?). Also, Remini isn't afraid to offer analysis as he goes; it makes the book more interesting and I think it ultimately makes it more objective because you understand his biases.
   
   My only quibble, and this is very minor, is the author (or publisher's) decision to blank out the swear words. Jackson swore to great effect, and this quasi-censorship diminishes that effect a little.



2. In the first of three volumes, Remini carries Jackson from birth to the tragic loss of much of his family in the Revolution, through his early years in politics, his duels, and the Battle of New Orleans, up to his term as first American Governor of the territory of Florida, acquired by his own military victories.
   
   Remini admires Jackson, and argues persuasively for his huge historic importance - not just President Jackson, but the younger Jackson of this book, responsible for acquiring a large chunk of what ultimately became the Southeast USA in several Indian wars and treaty negotiations, the campaigns of the War of 1812, and his subsequent attacks on the Spanish colony of Florida. Many historians have condemned Jackson for siezing Florida without the explicit approval of the Monroe administration; Remini is convincing in his argument that Monroe must have known and encouraged Jackson's actions, although he was careful not to say so directly, since Spain and the US were not at war.
   
   Remini doesn't by any means try to whitewash Jackson. The man shown in these pages is impressive but often distinctly unpleasant. Remini quite directly calls him a 'bully', and the story of his feuds and duels shows a man who is ruthless and foolishly ill-tempered. The ugliest part of the Jackson story is his treatment of the native tribes; Remini offers some half-hearted apologias for Jackson's ruthless treatment even of those natives who fought with him in his campaigns, but tells the facts frankly enough that most readers will come to a harsher conclusion.
   
   Remini shows that Jackson's famous victory in the Battle of New Orleans was a closer thing than is generally supposed. Jackson carelessly left a crucial avenue open to the British, and a more determined general would have marched on the city and probably taken it before Jackson had his defenses properly prepared. As it was, the British foolishly gave Jackson sufficient time to settle in and fortify his line, only then attacking it with disastrous results. Although this battle is often viewed as an afterthought (the Treaty of Ghent, ending the war, was actually signed a few days before the battle was fought), Remini also shows that a British victory would have had real, and catastrophic, consequences for the US.
   
   Along with the colorful and often complex story of Jackson's life and activities, Remini fills in the story with good explanations of the conditions of the period. In particular, he gives a good explanation of the values and traits of westerners, and East-West conflicts, at an early time in the country's history when the Pacific was barely dreamed of and the 'Far West' meant the Mississippi.
   
   Remini's writing is excellent, and the biography is detailed and exhaustively researched without being pedantic or boring.



3. Andrew Jackson is one of the more complicated figures in American history. On the one hand, his significance to the development of the United States as a nation is large. On the other hand, he was often a very unpleasant person.

   This first volume in Robert Remini's biography follows Jackson's life from his childhood through his governorship of Florida. Along the way, we learn of Jackson's brief roles in both houses of Congress and his period as a judge; it is later, however, when he joined the military (becoming a general through politics rather than merit), that Jackson rose to nationwide prominence, especially his overwhelming humiliation of the British in the Battle of New Orleans and his later dealings with Indians and the Spanish which led eventually to the U.S. acquiring Florida.

   His military victories made him one of the most popular people in American history, but Remini pulls no punches with Jackson's flaws, including his often brutal and bullying nature and his tendency to violence. The ambiguous circumstances involving how he married his wife Rachel would lead to nasty talk during his presidential campaigns and his killing of a man in a duel (was it murder?) wouldn't help either.

   Having been previously exposed to Remini's writing through his brilliant biographies of Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, I knew this book would be a pleasure to read, and it was. Remini has written the definitive biography of Jackson, very detailed but always objective and always entertaining. If you want to learn of this era and of one its pivotal figures, this is the book to read (plus the other two in the series).




4. One might argue that the hallmark of great men is that they fundamentally and permanently alter the world they inherited - its beliefs, its practices, its conception of itself. Andrew Jackson is one of those extremely rare individuals.

   In this first of three volumes, which he subtitles "The Course of American Empire," Remini highlights the central role that Jackson played in opening up the early American frontier in the first decades of the 19th century. Long before the expression "Manifest Destiny" ignited the expansionist and nationalist passions of Americans in the 1840s, Andrew Jackson fought single-handedly - and occasionally circumvented direct military orders, the Constitution, local judges, and officially recognized international treaties - to advance American territorial expansion along the southern border and promote the removal of the Spanish, British and myriad tribes of native Americans.

   Other salient events that Remini chronicles in this volume include Jackson's humble roots and tragic childhood during the American Revolution in the Carolinas; his move westward to the Tennessee territory to start life anew as a lawyer; the "facts" behind Jackson's much-disputed relationship with his wife, Rachel; his entry into local politics and emergence as a militia leader; his military exploits against the Creeks, the British at the Battle of New Orleans and the Seminoles; and, of course, the many duels, fist-fights and other outlandish events of his early life that he somehow managed to survive.

   Much of Volume I reads like a "wild west" novel, but Remini is careful to accentuate how Jackson's natural rough hewn character, along with his experience on the frontier, melded to shape a political philosophy that ultimately altered the course of American government. There is little direct reference to the principles that would become known as Jacksonian Democracy in this volume - an undying faith in the virtue and wisdom of the people, the inviolability of the Union, the pernicious effects of deficit spending and "soft" currency, etc. - but it is easy to understand how and why Jackson cherished those ideals after reading the story of his early life.

   Finally, it must be noted that Remini assiduously avoids holding Jackson's conduct in relation to slavery and the Indians to modern standards. In all fairness, that is understandable and not especially offensive. However, Remini does neither himself nor Jackson any service by going out of his way to stress how relatively humane (in Remini's mind) the president was to his human chattel and explaining that he really had the Indians best interests at heart when he forced them from their land to the barren plains of modern day Oklahoma. In this volume and the others, Remini offers some strongly worded criticism of Jackson's political, military and social performance, but his many heinous crimes against humanity are treated with kid gloves throughout.




5. This meticulously researched and wonderfully written book is the first volume in a three-part biography of Jackson that will undoubtedly set the standard for years to come.
   Part of what makes Remini's work so useful is that he does not rely solely on American sources but has also dug deep into the Archivo General de Indies in Seville, Spain in order to try to see Jackson from the viewpoint of the Spanish colonial government. It was this research that led Remini to his main thesis in this book which is that Jackson, thru his military exploits against the Indians of the southern United States (notably the Creek, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole and Chickasaw tribes) and against the Spanish in Florida did as much or more than any other individual to extend U.S. territory into much of Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, and all of Florida. One of the more interesting revelations of the book for me was the mutual admiration and the shared goals at this point in their lives between Jackson and Monroe's Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams.
   In fact, Remini makes a good argument that Jackson's military exploits in that region were is what enabled Adams to deal so successfully with the Spanish in negotiating the Trans-Continental Treaty of 1819. This treaty formalized the recognition of the European powers of the territory added to the U.S. by Jefferson in the Louisiana Purchase. Up until then the purchase was widely recognized as illegal.
   So why don't I give this book a higher rating? I think that Remini falls prey to a common tendency of American historians who take on the task of writing the lives of our great men. As a reading public, we do not seem to want to acknowledge the dark side of our leaders or our history. As a result, it is difficult to write biographies that do not border on hagiography. Remini for the most part avoids this failing. He is clear about Jackson's violent (murderous, really) temper, his tendency to bully others until they gave in and his paternalism. This is not a man I would have wanted to know.
   Where Remini does not quite live up to his own standards is in regards to Jackson's (to my mind) overt racism. Jackson regarded the presence of the Indians anywhere in territory that was being settled by Americans as unacceptable unless the Indians were willing to give up their tribal territories, accept a farming plot and become good little American citizens. Remini tries to convince his readers that Jackson the paternalist hated only the tribes not the individual Indians and that therefore Jackson and his policies were not racist (see the discussion on p. 337). I leave it up to the reader of this review whether this defense is adequate. I think that the last fifty years has amply proved that a racist can befriend individual members of the hated group as long as that individual keeps their place. I think that this is actually a rather common type of racism and Jackson exemplifies to a plentitude. To be fair to both Remini and Jackson he had a life long history of defending the underdog if they applied to him for protection.
   Of course, this makes Jackson a paragon of the southern culture of the time but we also need to be honest about our own history. Jackson was a racist, he initiated Indian policies that were, at the least, marginally genocidal (the Indians called Jackson, Sharp Knife) and he was still one of our greatest men, one who had an enormous influence on our historical destiny. Remini, the good honest scholar that he is, gives us enough material and detail so that we get enough of the story so that we can sort out our own vision of the truth.

5 comments about The Bureau and the Mole: The Unmasking of Robert Philip Hanssen, the Most Dangerous Double Agent in FBI History.

1. This book doesn't compare with David Wise's book "Spy, The Inside Story of How the FBI's Robert Hanssen Betrayed America." There seems to be a lot of assumptions and conjecture's in the Vise book. Wise has much better sources.



2. The book provided background on not only Robert Hanssen, but also the individuals associated with the job. I enjoyed the book very much.



3. A frightening look into the mind and works of a socially inadequate FBI Agent who betrayed the American people, trading their safety over cash and diamond. The most disturbing fact was his fantasy of retiring from the FBI and move to Moscow and train future spies. The author did an excellent job in telling the lives of a deceitful Hanssen and of a dedicated Director Freeh.
   
   Undoubtedly written by a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist.
   
   Check also: They Spy who Stayed out in the Cold.
   Cold Eyes



4. I felt the book was very interesting. It has a good narative form.
   I do feel, however, it could have been less graphic on some of Robert's home life. I did read it after seeing the movie "Breach". The book's characterizations of the two main personalities added interest. The author has done a good job with a difficult subject



5. This book was a page turner. The author built a psychological profile of Robert Hansesn as well as reported historical facts, to try to give us some insight into his motivation, as well as placed him in a historical context. How could someone who loved this country and was devoted to law enforcement become such a terrible traitor and cause the death of so many people? It gives an amazing account.

5 comments about Flawed Giant: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1961-1973.

1. Fine, scholarly biography of the Ph.D.-thesis type. Dallek relies mainly on documentary sources (which he reviewed copiously). The result is somewhat detached.
   
   You get little feel for the lengendary "Johnson treatment" that LBJ used to such great effect. There is, though, much quasi-psychological stuff. Johnson was poorly educated but intellectually brilliant. He was absolutely driven. He was Lincoln-like in his humor, his yarns, his frontier similes. But these gifts were often misdirected. He just had to be first, the best, at everything. He was frighteningly insecure, almost to the point of true paranoia. There are many stories of his abuse of subordinates.
   
   Dallek is a New Deal/Great Society liberal, and this viewpoint pervades. He is mostly enthusiastic about the Great Society and civil rights achievements, but scathing about Johnson's handling of Vietnam. The most revealing part is the recital of how Johnson felt forced to back into the war, and to try to do it almost surreptitiously. Reassuringly, Dallek presents Johnson as simply misguided and ill-advised. There is none of that Oliver Stone crap about being a tool of the military-industrial complex.
   
   Robert Caro's latest volume in his multi-volume opus, "The Master of The Senate", takes Johnson only up to 1960. Dallek's two volumes cover Johnson's whole life. Caro puts in ten years of research for every one that Dallek has put in, and Caro's doggedness is beyond herioc. Dallek is a solid, straightforward writer (unusual for an academic), but he has little of Caro's inspired literary style. Flesh, blood, and sinew pervade Caro's books. Dallek's sounds like a political science seminar.
   
   Read it by all means, if you are interested in Johnson. But wait for Caro's next volume is you want the definitive treatment.



2. I sped through last year reading all three mammoth books in Robert A. Caro's Pulitzer Prize-winning LBJ biography series, and found them an incredibly readable, detailed portrayal of a man who was half megalomaniac, half incredibly gifted politician, a complex American Shakespearean character whose presidency crumbled into self-induced tragedy. Caro hasn't written the final book in his series yet concentrating on LBJ's presidency, so I decided to check out a competing LBJ biography by Dallek focusing on those years. And it's solid history, with great insight into LBJ's character and the disastrous decisions he made in Vietnam that undermined all the powerful social changes he achieved in civil rights and Medicare. Yet "Flawed Giant" is also kind of a slog, which Caro's books weren't. I can't quite put my finger on it, but Dallek lacks the fluid prose, deft research into place and era, and storytelling talent that Caro brought to LBJ - I was able to read hundreds of pages about dry as toast subjects like congressional redistricting and vote tallies and found them compelling reading under Caro. Yet here, I ended up getting bored silly by Dallek's bland recitation of the ups and downs of Vietnam, which you think would be interesting stuff. Dallek is a bit more even-handed in his appreciation of LBJ than Caro, but it just all felt a little too much like work. Guess it goes to show that it's as much in the storyteller as it is in the story. I'll be eagerly awaiting Caro's take on this same era, whenever it comes out.



3. Robert Dallek completes his two volume biography of Lyndon B. Johnson with "Flawed Giant". Its a well written book that tells the story of a brilliant politician who is overwhelmed and outmatched by events he failed to anticipate.
   
   The book begins with Johnson in the unhappy position of serving as Vice President under John F. Kennedy. A most difficult place for a man of Johnson's ego and stature to find himself. Nevertheless, Johnson struggles and does the best he can with this job obtaining recognition in his efforts to further U.S. diplomacy abroad and advance the space program.
   
   On November 22, 1963, President Kennedy is assassinated and Johnson becomes President. No one could ever accuse Johnson of not seizing the moment and this he does masterfully. Within a year, he obtains passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and a number of domestic initiatives aimed at reducing poverty and improving quality of life for Americans that become known as the "Great Society". Johnson's accomplishments as President all took place during the first two years of his presidency. Some of those accomplishments include the Head Start Program for disadvantaged children, a federal student loan program for college students, the Job Corps program for kids who dropped out of school, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which enfranchised millions of blacks, the National Endowment for the Arts, and Medicare.
   
   Johnson proves his skill as a politician by defeating opponent Barry Goldwater with almost 62% of the vote in the 1964 election. Unfortunately, these same skills waned as time went on. By the end of 1965, the positive accomplishments of the Johnson Presidency had come to an end. Johnson inherited the Vietnam War from his predecessor, John F. Kennedy. However, he made a series of mistakes after doing so. First, he concluded that America had to hold onto South Vietnam and prevent a "take over" by the North. He never grasped that the conflict was not an attack by the communist world upon the free world, but simply a regional civil war that had gone for decades. Second, he failed to grasp early on that the conflict was not winnable by conventional means, so he committed 500,000 American soldiers. Third, he failed to understand that the American people wouldn't stand idly by for years supporting such a war with no measurable progress being made. Fourth, he failed to consider steps such as simply withdrawing when it did become apparent that the war was unwinnable.
   
   As the Johnson Presidency unfolds, the accomplishments of the Great Society are overwhelmed by the Vietnam War. Johnson finally realizes his mistake at the end of his presidency. He announces he won't run again and initiates peace talks with North Vietnam.
   
   One must look at Johnson carefully and not jump to conclusions. He was a complicated man who did much good during his presidency. Sadly, though, he will most likely be remembered for the Vietnam War which cost America 58,000 lives.



4. Over the last several years I've read more than 30 presidential biographies, usually letting Amazon reader's guide me to the best choice. While I would place Dallek's LBJ Volume 1 in the top five presidential biographies, Volume two is not quite in the same class. Dallek continues to write well, and I think he presents a complex man and a very difficult time in a balanced way. But over half of this biography details the morass of Viet Nam, and it is truly depressing to read as Johnson and his advisers relentlessly lead the country over the cliff.
   
   During the first two years of LBJ's presidency he led the US Congress to pass some of the most significant legislation in our history - Medicare, greatly increased low income housing, legal aid, increased funding for education and student loans, the most important civil rights legislation of the 20th Century, and the Great Society legislation, a muddled effort to end poverty.
   
   Then, slowly and inexorably LBJ took the US deeper and deeper into Viet Nam. Dallek argues that whatever other geo-political factors were involved, LBJ's drive to be a great president and his fear of failing made the Viet Nam catastrophe inevitable. Johnson simply could not admit to being the first president to lose a war, he couldn't cope with the reality of the corruption of Viet Nam's leadership, and he couldn't stand to be honest in telling the American people just how poorly the war was going. Dallek presents a president who was increasingly paranoid of a nonexistent communist menace influencing the anti-war movement and of Bobby Kennedy leading JFK's ghost to steal LBJ's legacy.
   
   Today, there are numerous editorials comparing the war in Iraq to Vietnam (or denying any comparison). I've yet to see an article comparing President Bush to LBJ, and in most ways they are polar opposites. Still, this biography is very timely. There are unmistakable similarities between America's descent into the two wars, Iraq and South Viet Nam's lack of resources to provide leadership to their own people, our leaders' reluctance to level with the US, the isolation each president sought to avoid criticism, and a society that was so polarized by other issues that it is somehow ok to not take an objective look at the facts of the war.



5. Capt. Lance Sijan, USAF Medal of Honor winner, was tortured to death while a captive in a North Vietnam prison. Gerry Coyle, Army PFC, died in Tay Ninh . Bill Fahey, Marine PFC, died in Quang Tri . Leo Matylewicz, an Army Spec 4, had his body literally blown to pieces in Kontum. Dave Rozelle was killed in Quang Tri while a Marine Lance Corporal. Tom Malloy, Army Spec 4, died in Bien Hoa. Mike Turose's body was never recovered for a return home or even a burial when his F-4 was shot down over North Vietnam. Dick Christy was killed over Cambodia when his forward air control aircraft was shot down. Mike Bosiljevac's remains were not recovered until Vietnam opened up to allow forensic search teams years after the war was over - 20 years after he was shot down over North Vietnam. Mike Blassie's remains were placed in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. in 1998 DNA testing identified the remains as Mike. He had been shot down over An Loc.
   Why do I list these men killed in Vietnam as the introduction to this review of Robert Dallek's biography of Lyndon Johnson - "Flawed Giant"? Because Lyndon Johnson as President of the United States from Jack Kennedy's assassination until 1968 might as well have pulled the trigger or pressed the button that sent them to their deaths. Jane Fonda may have posed on the North Vietnamese anti-aircraft weapons but Lyndon Johnson placed those men in harm's way - for no reason other than his fantastic ego. Let me quote Dallek's afterword:
   "Vietnam was a larger mistake. It was the worst foreign policy disaster in the country's history. Aside from the sacrifice of the many brave men and women who lost their lives or suffered because of the conflict, there seems nothing heroic about the struggle. ... Vietnam was a morass. The battlefield clashes and constant discussions in Washington and Saigon about the war were a confusion leading nowhere. ... the planning for Vietnam led to unproductive commitments in what came to seem like an open-ended conflict.
   ...
   "The principal products of administration discussions about the fighting were false hopes, self-generated illusions, and paranoid fears of domestic opponents, who were not the Communist dupes Johnson believed them to be but men and women devoted to the national security and well-being as anyone in the government and military."
   "Johnson knew from the first that he might be pursuing a losing case in Vietnam."
   "Even less flattering to LBJ is the reality that he also pursued the war for selfish motives. To admit failure on so big an issue as Vietnam would have been too jarring to Johnson's self-image as a can-do leader."
   During the 1964 presidential campaign when Johnson ran against Goldwater, one of the Democrat slogans was "If you vote for Goldwater your sons will be in Vietnam." Well, my parents voted for Goldwater and I ended up in Vietnam.
   This book covers the years from 1961 to Johnson's death in 1973. Of course there is more than Vietnam. Johnspn's outstanding record on civil rights is well covered. But, for me, I cannot help but think about being in the Boy Scouts with Mike Turose and wondering what our futures would be after we got out of engineering school. Fortunately for me. I ended up with a future. Thanks to Lyndon Johnson, Mike didn't.

5 comments about Across Boundaries.

1. This book is about Mamphelafs political life. Personal aspects of her life are rarely told unless they pertain to her activism or illustrate inequality. Individuals are rarely mentioned; those that are, are rarely mentioned more than once.

   Donft read this book if you want an old-fashioned story with interesting characters who interact to create entertaining plots.

   Read this book to learn about the battle of a black woman against patriarchal apartheid. Read about her gsuperwomanh strengths and the sacrifices she made for the movement.




2. Across Boundaries is an excellent book focussing on a mother's struggle to want a job and to be a mother at the same time. Even thogh this book was written by a woman from Africa it still pertains to many American mothers who struggle over the same problem. This book did not only focus on the mother aspect, but also on the fact that a woman wanted to help the condition of other woman also.



3. I found Mamphela Ramphele's autobiography very interesting and amazing. The struggles she went through during her life absolutely amazed me! She is one of the strongest women I have ever heard of. I enjoyed reading about her fight for rights, her relationship with Steve Biko, and how she balanced all of her activities. I found it very interesting that she did not put motherhood as a priority in her life as many other women do. I enjoyed reading "Across Boundaries" and I thought Mamphela did a good job of telling the true story of her life.



4. Across Boundaries was an excellent book about a women's struggle to be amother and have a career. As said in the book "Recognising thatyou are a member of the global village is essential to lifting you above the narrow nationalistic interests and concerns of your own country (222)." Mamphela's life was a pursuit for women to rise above the boundaries and the story was very detailed, and well written! END



5. Across Boundaries by Mamphela Ramphele is a fascinating autobiography about the extraordinary journey of a South African woman leader. From historical events to her personal experiences, Ramphele describes these events and struggles with dignity. Throughout her endeavors as a young child and continued to her adulthood, she is committed and determined to succeed and to make a difference. An honest testimony that shows her fears and courage. This is an excellent book and it will keep you reading for this one woman's strength is amazing. Through moderate to difficult times and tribulations Mamphela Ramphele keeps a remarkable and uplifting attitude that helps bring new light to unfortunate situations.

5 comments about James Dobson's War on America.

1. I couldn't wait to get this book and I wasn't disappointed after I read it.
   Before you think sour grapes about the man that wrote it you need to know that most evangelicals are soft hearted people and very moderate so for this man to blow the whistle on this powerful man who is in the Christian media business. It was a life changing move for the author he had to leave this field completely in order to make a living because Mr. Dobson has the power to prevent him from staying in the Christian media business,Mr. Dobson makes lots of money for the companies he deals with for books,DVD,etc.and he doesn't hesitate to drop the company if they don't do what he wants. It's really something to see how he runs this empire. There are so few people that reach that height with so much money and power that doesn't become corrupted. As Mr. Dobson is a fundamentalist he is not the person that should be involved in politics. He stays away from the secular media and uses the radio to reach women who are 54% of the vote. He circulates emails that create hate for gays and pro choice for women and he wants to change the separation of church and state law. This book was written in 1997 as a warning which no one heeded and now when Mr. Dobson's says something on the radio the politicians get swamped with phone calls and emails from his followers which gives the politicians the wrong idea about what is really happening.
   Mr. Dobson's followers have no idea there are two personalities the warm and fuzzy family advisers and the tyrant that runs Focus on the Family and tries to intimidate politicians. The book has more detail about Mr.Dobson and the things he does it will shock you if you are a Christian and have heard him on the radio. You need to know from whom you are taking advice and supporting with you purchases.



2. Wow - what we have here is a clash of core beliefs. If you look at things from Dobson's core beliefs (whether you agree with them or not - and being in America we have to agree he has the right to believe and ACT on them) his actions and agenda are pretty consistent. Has he or his organization made mis-steps or been guilty at times of hubris? Arguably yes - but I dare say you would be hard pressed to find any organization anywhere that couldn't be accused of the same thing. Dobson admits his human-ness, and his falibility - despite the author's assertion that "Dobson's Nazarene belief that he is sinless and morally perfect results in Dobson's stance that he is morally superior to others, even his employees." I've heard Dobson admit a number of times on his own sinfulness - so this is an example of the trouble I have with many of the inferences the author makes from Dobson's background or associations.
   
   Most of the reviews I've read wind up at a fundamental level disagreeing or mis-stating Dobson's core belief - and the mis-statement I'm guessing comes back to their own perceptions of what is "right and wrong". So - my bottom line is - you've got an author here who - like Dobson - has his own agenda. If you are looking for a "balanced" review of Dobson - you won't find it here. You will find compelling information, and certainly it will serve as a base for doing your own research. Just realize that a man writing a book and changing his whole world view because he got fired by the man he is writing about MAY be writing with a bias of his own. :)
   
   For your reference, here's an example of the misunderstanding of where Dobson is coming from (with my comments in CAPS) from the April 2004 review
   
   "a. Legislating so-called "Christian principles." As a religion, Christianity is to be accepted by individuals, not by imposing its principles into law by decree. The Christian faith cannot be spread by imposing it onto others. REMEMBER THAT DOBSON HAS MULTIPLE AGENDAS - HERE YOU HAVE THE REVIEWER MIXING HIS AGENDA FOR EVANGELISM WITH HIS AGENDA FOR PROMOTING A LEGAL FRAMEWORK THAT REINFORCES DOBSON'S VIEW ON RIGHT AND WRONG ACTIONS TAKEN FROM A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE. ANY LEGAL FRAMEWORK PROMOTES A VALUE SYSTEM - E.G. MURDER IS WRONG, ETC. DOBSON IS LOOKING FOR ONE CONSISTENT WITH HIS BELIEF STRUCTURE - WHICH IS WHAT ALL OF US DO.
   
   c. Furthermore, you don't have to be politically conservative to be a Christian. NO - DOBSON WOULDN'T FIGHT YOU ON THAT EITHER. HE WOULD HOWEVER ON SPECIFIC ISSUES CHALLENGE YOU TO SUPPORT BIBLICALLY SPECIFIC AREAS WHERE YOU DISAGREE WITH HIM. TO HIM THE BIBLE IS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY - SO REFERENCE HIM BACK TO IT. HE FEELS SOME TRADITIONAL "LIBERAL" POSITIONS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH A LITERAL BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION - BUT IF YOU HELD THEM HE WOULDN'T SAY YOU AREN'T A CHRISTIAN - JUST THAT YOU AREN'T BEING CONSISTENT WITH CHRIST'S TEACHING ON THOSE ISSUES.
   
   d. I am a straight married woman, but I don't think I have a right to interfere in the lives of the gay community. I don't see them as messengers of evil, and I have no vendetta against them, either political or religious. AGAIN - DOBSON'S VIEW ARE DRAWN FROM HIS VIEW OF THE BIBLE AS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY. CERTAINLY READING IT AT FACE VALUE YOU ARE HARD PRESSED TO SAY THE BIBLE IS NEUTRAL OR "PRO" HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVITY OR THAT IT DOESN'T CAST A MORAL VALUE OF "SIN" ON IT. SINCE DOBSON BELIEVES THAT SOCIETY IS MOST "HEALTHY" WHEN IT HAS LAWS IN PLACE THAT MIRROR BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES - HE IS PURSUING ACTIVITIES THAT REINFORCE THAT VIEWPOINT.
   
   2. His attitude towards women. Many women see Dobson as their friend, but he clearly upholds a hierarchical view of the male as the "head." While this doesn't necessarily need to be a problem (though it often ends up that way) he also puts women into a "Catch 22" situation:
   AGAIN - YOU HAVE TO REFERENCE HIS BASELINE VALUES DRAWN FROM A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE. HE IS BEING CONSISTENT TO HIS BELIEF SYSTEM - WITH HIS CORE BELIEF BEING THAT A SOCIETY WILL BE HEALTHIEST WHEN IT HAS ITS LAWS AND FAMILY STRUCTURES BASED ON THAT BIBLICAL POSITION. SO IF YOU DISAGREE WITH HIS POSITION ON THIS, HE WOULD SAY HE ISN'T PUTTING YOU IN A CATCH 22 POSITION - SINCE WOMEN IN THE BIBLE HAD MULTIPLE ROLES IN HOME AND FAMILY THAT WOULD AVOID THE CATCH 22 THE REVIEWER REFERENCES. AGAIN - DIFFERING PERSPECTIVES ON FOUNDATIONAL ISSUES.
   =================================



3. Frankly, when I watch Jerry Falwell debate his arch nemesis, pornographer Larry Flynt, I am not sure who is more dangerous. I am not sure who is more of a disgusting and contemptible pig.
   
   I was born and raised in the conservative evangelical movement, and I cannot stomach listening to Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, or any of the other imbeciles that my fellow teammates have dubbed their leaders.
   
   What I find very difficult to swallow is how they have turned certain "sins" into whipping posts so they can prop themselves up as moral crusaders. Down with wine! Down with women! Down with wearing dungarees!
   
   But what about being a proud jerk of a human being?
   
   What is equally frightening is that the Bible clearly states that there will be people on that Day that will stand in complete shock when told, "Depart from me"; that somehow they miscalculated all of their moral filabustering and self-righteousness as something that God had intended them to do.
   
   I've met Dobson's son... he's an idiot. Focus on your own damn family indeed.
   
   Hooray Gil...



4. Because Dr. James Dobson is such a prominent Christian leader, it is hard to provide a critique of his ministry without getting into hot water in some circles. But Gil Alexander-Moeggerle has done his critique, and I found that this book has answered some uneasy feelings I had for a long time -- especially after Dobson became so deeply entrenched into right wing politics.

   I will not re-hash the book here. Previous reviews have shown the outline of the book, the topics covered, etc., as well as being able to look inside parts of the book here on Amazon.

   However, I will share some problems I began having as I followed his ministry more. When I first started reading Dobson's books, I appreciated his views on the development of children and some of his practical psychological wisdom. However, my misgivings began to crystalize into two categories.

   1. Political involvement. Now please understand -- I have no problem with Christians being involved in politics. But I do have serious issues with the following:

   a. Legislating so-called "Christian principles." As a religion, Christianity is to be accepted by individuals, not by imposing its principles into law by decree. The Christian faith cannot be spread by imposing it onto others.

   b. Although I am pro-family, pro-business and pro-life, I don't believe that the "conservative" camp exclusively owns these issues.

   c. Furthermore, you don't have to be politically conservative to be a Christian.

   d. I am a straight married woman, but I don't think I have a right to interfere in the lives of the gay community. I don't see them as messengers of evil, and I have no vendetta against them, either political or religious.

   d. I get the impression that Dobson doesn't have a clue as to how the poor live and the challenges they face.

   2. His attitude towards women. Many women see Dobson as their friend, but he clearly upholds a hierarchical view of the male as the "head." While this doesn't necessarily need to be a problem (though it often ends up that way) he also puts women into a "Catch 22" situation:

   a. He wants women to make their homes and families the center of their lives.

   b. But then, he has critiqued the fact that women don't seem to talk about topics from as broad a base as men do -- and has even had programs that impress on women that they need to have something in their lives besides home and family. But he forgets that MANY women have made the home and family the center of their lives by listening to HIM.

   I worked at a religious radio station for a while where Dobson's program was aired, and one time I had the poor judgment to express some of my problems with Dobson's ideas -- and I was treated like I had attacked God Himself!

   I think that Dobson is trying to amass too much power (if it hasn't already happened) and is trying to speak for the Christian community as a whole. Well, Dobson does not represent all Christians.

   The best way to "Christianize" a country is for Christians to non-coercively share Jesus Christ with their family, friends, colleagues, etc., and let them accept Christ on their own. If enough Christians will simply live their lives as Christ would have them live it and practice GENUINE Christian love (I Corinthians 13) then I believe that more people will become Christians than through any kinds of laws made by any kind of government.




5. I can't believe some of the nutty reviews posted for this book. Some of the vitriol directed towards this book & its author reminds me of the remark Disraeli made about the Jewish fear of Christianity: Jews were terrified of Christians due to ages & ages of "Christian love," i.e. pogroms, demonization, persistent persecution, etc. That same "loving" spirit has saturated many of these reviews posted on Amazon.com.

   Whether you like it or not, this nation was formed on secular principles, not on the Christian religion. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison and Paine were deists. John Adams had Unitarian views. The Founding Fathers based their experiment on rationalism, not on any transcendental foundation. They drew their inspiration from a wide variety of sources, including atheists (like Voltaire & David Hume). You certainly have a right to believe whatever you want, but don't rewrite history.

   Gil Alexander-Moegerle was an insider in the weird world of Christian fundamentalism. In fact, he was the right-hand man to the Religious Right's most powerful (and clandestine) leader, Dr. James Dobson. Although it may be easy to dismiss it as "sour grapes" and a hatchet job, War On America actually has a balanced tone. Alexander-Moegerle never resorts to trash talk; frankly, I kind of wished that he would have hit Dobson a little harder. Alexander-Moegerle's relationship with Dobson is of minor interest, however, compared to the tell-all on the inner workings of Dobson's operation.

   Taking refuge in the tax-exempt status of religious organizations, Dobson's Focus On The Family has played unfair hardball with other religious publishers, such as Word, Inc. According to the author, Dobson also has a penchant for meddling in his employees' personal lives. This is entirely believable, considering Dobson's self-appointed status as America's moral guardian.

   Like many a successful multimedia preacher (Graham, Falwell, Robertson, Colson), Dobson makes it a point to lavish support on the Republican party, both secretly through lobbying, and openly. This itself should be enough to revoke the "tax-exempt" status of these men. Dobson's dubious lack of salary is also given an interesting twist, as is his boorish treatment of those he disagrees with. In this light, Dobson seems more of a wrathful Jehovah than a gentle Jesus.

   One of the author's most interesting observations is his view on the political development of the Religious Right. It was initially a sleeping giant, awoke to become destructive, and now this giant has to decide as to which path it will take: dialogue or destruction.

   The only quibble I have is that Alexander-Moegerle seems to imply that he never would have altered his ultra right-wing views except for the fact that he was fired by Dobson. If that is indeed the case, I'm glad he got canned. Unlike the vast majority of the Religious Right, Gil understands the need for compromise in a pluralistic society. For that, I salute him.

5 comments about The Bandit Queen of India: An Indian Woman's Amazing Journey from Peasant to International Legend.

1. Amazing to realize that this kind of stories are real, and that enven though they are terrible, they are not that unique in our world. It is a must to read if you are interested in a woman's bravery.



2. This book is about Phoolan Devi, aka the Bandit Queen. The book takes you through her early years, which were full of violence, racism/castism/and sexism, to her rise in India's parliament. It is a compelling read, if not a violent one, and at times I had to put it down to contemplate this woman and what she had to overcome in this life.



3. Phoolan Devi is an amazing individual no doubt who overcame obstacles bigger than most of us face. Here's what I like about the book: It was a tale told from the eyes of someone who was in poverty of what it's REALLY like... generally we hear about the situations of such people through the eyes of an empathetic outsider and here is a vivid inside perspective. Most impoverished people never get to tell their tales and I think the two authors who wrote what Phoolan dictated (she could not read/write) did the world a favor. This book has raised my awareness.
   
   From a story perspective, it is more incredible than most fictional novels.



4. Reviewed by Mary Greenwood for Reader Views (08//06)
   
   "The Bandit Queen of India" is a true story of Phoolan Devi, as told to French journalists Marie-Therese Cuny and Paul Rambali who transcribed the story for her since she was unable to read or write. Phoolan Devi was born into a family of boatmen called Mullahs, who were the lowest caste, in a small village in Ottar Pradesh, India. "The Bandit Queen of India" is unrelenting in showing the grueling life of low-caste girls in India. If written as fiction, one could not believe that all this tragedy, cruelty and degradation could come to one person. Phoolan and her sisters are beaten by their parents, mostly by their mother. Times are so bad that her mother was thankful when twin daughters died after birth. Later, when, yet another girl was born, her mother refused to nurse her and made the rest of the family find food for her. Mothers pray to have boy babies. There never was enough to eat. Their caste was expected to do the worst jobs such as picking lice from others' scalps and not ask for anything in return. Her father told her it was her duty to do these things. Once when doing a menial chore, she saw mangoes and asked for a little piece. The upper-caste man slapped her very hard and said: `How dare you ask me for a mango! Today you want a mango. Tomorrow it will be something else!"
   
   Devi was married at the age of 11 for a dowry of a cow and bicycle to a man in his 30's she had met once. Her father asked his future son-in-law to wait to take the girl until she was older. Instead the husband takes her and beats and rapes her. Ever her new father-in-law, who pretends to help her, betrays her. Later she is able to escape and goes back to her village where she is ostracized because she did not stay with her husband even though she is only 11. Her parents could only protect her for a few years and finally the husband came back and claimed his wife and brandished his fury on her for escaping earlier. If that was not enough, she was also brutally gang-raped by bandits. Later one of the bandits, Vikram, saved her from sure death and fell in love with her. She became the Bandit Queen and Vikram was the Bandit King. They lived like Robin Hood taking from the rich and giving to the poor, sometimes even returning to the poor the same jewelry that had been stolen.
   
   When Vikram was murdered by one of their gang members, Phoolan was able to escape and formed her own gang. She went back to her village and murdered 22 upper-caste men, some of whom were involved in torturing and raping her. There was a great hunt for her, but she was able to evade capture. Later she was able to negotiate a deal with Indira Gandhi who agreed that she would not receive the death penalty. She then turned herself in and spent 11 years in jail. She was released and her case never went to trial. She was well-known and was elected to the Indian Parliament. Her life has come full circle. However, in 2001, on the way to her home from Parliament, she was assassinated, supposedly for retaliation for the murders of the 22 men.
   
   In the Epilogue of "The Bandit Queen of India," Phoolan explains why she wants her story told: "So many times I reached out my hands and nobody helped me. They called me a pest and a criminal. I never consider myself to be someone good, but I wasn't a criminal, either. All I did was make men suffer what they made me suffer. "Now for the first time, a woman from my community has been able to tell the truth about her life and testify in public to the injustice we all had to suffer. It was my hope that my testimonial would give help to others; other women, my sisters who have been humiliated, and my brothers who are being exploited."
   
   "The Bandit Queen of India" focuses on her early life and as she is subjected to more and more indignities, humiliations and degradations, it is not hard to see why she would want to get revenge when she had a chance. The reader does not have to condone the violence and murder in order to understand it. It is a harsh life and it is not hard to see why the legend of the Bandit Queen has endured. It is a true "rags to riches" story except that the riches are the power to effect political change. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to know more about the plight of women in India, the cruelties of the caste system and the story of a woman who had nothing and never gave up but was able to fight back. She is truly a modern Robin Hood and as such her legend lives on.



5. for an illiterate and uneducated person of a low cast this true story makes me see india in a new light. Now i am inspired to read more about indian mythology, religon and culture. Her death and suffering where not in vain...

No comments about Martin Luther King, Jr.: A Biography (Greenwood Biographies).

1 comments about An Honest Calling: The Law Practice of Abraham Lincoln.

1. In An Honest Calling attorney Mark E. Steiner makes good use of his professional training and years spent in helping to compile Lincoln's legal papers.
   
   Study of Lincoln's law career has long been hampered by the scattered nature of Lincoln's court documents throughout Illinois and the Midwest. Now they are gathered together, and Steiner has made a fine presentation of what they reveal about Lincoln's "day job," which may have consumed as much of his time as politics did. Steiner deals with Lincoln's law practice in general and with some individual cases revealing Lincoln's handling of particular issues (including slavery and railroad corporations). Civil and criminal practices are covered.
   
   This is an excellent introduction to Lincoln's law practice, and will also interest persons seeking information about the influence of attorneys on the Western frontier.